Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2012: Leonardo DiCaprio and Samuel L. Jackson in Django Unchained

Leonardo DiCaprio did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a Golden Globe and winning the NBR, for portraying Calvin Candie in Django Unchained.

Leonardo DiCaprio seemed pretty assured of a nomination for this film playing against his usual type of hero by playing a nasty unrepentant villain. I suppose maybe he needed to ugly himself up more than just with his teeth. Also though more importantly he probably had a hard time getting what seemed to be the "cool" vote that was being competed for by Waltz, DiCaprio, and Javier Bardem. DiCaprio had a serious handicap in that Waltz was leading and he was not in the same exact film. In the end there was really just too much against him to get that nomination, and Bardem very well might have been the sixth place in terms of votes.

Leonardo DiCaprio for awhile now has been playing some roles of men who are suffering something whether it is a terrible marriage, the stress of being an undercover cop, or having dead wives. Understandably these have not exactly been the most jovial of performances that is why it is quite nice to see DiCaprio take on such a different sort of character here. DiCaprio plays a horrendous character here as Calvin Candie a plantation owner who loves to indulge in Mandingo fighting which is having his slaves fight to the death in hand to hand combat. Despite the lowly nature of the character this is one of the liveliest performances DiCaprio has ever given.

DiCaprio makes Calvin Candie who loves all that he does, and loves his life in general. DiCaprio makes Calvin Candie a man who has no hesitations about what he does with all of his slaves. DiCaprio in the first scene is unabashed in showing that Calvin Candie is just enjoying himself, and this perfectly fitting for a man who always has been a slaver, therefore would never have any second thoughts on the subject. It is quite an effective way to portray the character, and even well watching two men kill each other DiCaprio has Calvin act like it is some sort of casual sport simply there just for his amusement.

Leonardo DiCaprio takes on the role with a specific manner and style which is that of the stereotypical southern gentleman. They are quite effectively done in a humorous fashion, although not to the point that he becomes a full on parody. He makes his accent and his manner infused properly into his characterization and only amplifies the dynamic between his pleasant demeanor and his horrible actions. DiCaprio's performance is very overt in his style here in the way he emphasizes every line he has, and he is very entertaining because of frankly how much he does play up his character's particular manner.

It should be noted that as well as just being an entertaining character he is an effective villain as well. Although Calvin is being duped by freed slave Django (Jamie Foxx), and bounty hunter King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) for most of DiCaprio screen time there are very important moments during this where he is quite strong in portraying the evil nature of the man. The most effective being of when he orders that an escaped slave be fed alive to dogs. DiCaprio is terrific in the way he shows how casual Candie is about the whole thing, but also his reaction when Schultz offers to save the slave is particularly well handled. In the short moment DiCaprio expresses the confusion, and suspicion in the eyes of Calvin well, and properly establishes the idea that their ruse probably will be broken.

We follow the two as they lead up to Calvin's plantation which brings them us to Samuel L. Jackson who also was not Oscar nominated for portraying the role of Stephen in this film. When DiCaprio first appears he comes on strong, but when Jackson shows up he practically devours the scenery as Calvin Candie's head slave Stephen. Jackson shows up playing the part almost like one of those stereotypes of black people found in some of the films of the 1930s. Jackson though of course does in a very knowing fashion and makes Stephen a tremendous burst of energy for the film right when it needs it.

Jackson just like DiCaprio portrays his character as unabashedly racist. As strange as it might sound he makes Stephen seem even more racist that Calvin if that is possible. Jackson is incredibly good here with everything he does with Stephen from his over the top limp to his excessively fussy manner of speaking as well as his wild expressions. Jackson teeters brilliantly on that tightrope that is overacting. Overacting is something that only some actors can do, and if an actor is to do it they better have good a reason for doing so. Jackson is an actor who can overact, and he is has a very good reason for doing so as the head house slave Stephen.

Jackson perfectly plays up the absurdity of this character which certainly makes since considering that Stephen who considers his own kind lowly, and seems to love being a slave. He makes the absolute most of his material here actualyl being rather hilarious in just how absurdly racist Stephen is in the way he reacts to Django and basically cannot fathom a black man as a free man, as well as espouses extremely loudly, even louder than Calvin, how poorly he thinks of his own kind. Jackson is great here because although he is playing what is essentially a cartoon in a way, he makes Stephen into an actual character still in his own right and is believable as this very odd sort of man.

Now after we are introduced to Stephen Calvin Schultz, and Django sit down to dinner with Stephen in attendance. This scene is where he and DiCaprio's performance come together in perfect harmony, and the two play well along with Christoph Waltz as well. Jackson and DiCaprio are excellent creating the very particularity camaraderie between the two. DiCaprio, Jackson, and Waltz all together make this just a wonderful scene. DiCaprio and Jackson are extremely amusing here with DiCaprio playing up Calvin's faux suaveness, and Jackson making Stephen's uncouthness as well as his toady that mostly entails him laughing at everything Calvin's says extremely funny as well as showing the dynamic they have when in the company of others.

Jackson and DiCaprio are really toe to toe until this point, but then we see a very different side of Stephen. When Stephen is not in plain view of others and is taking care of the house hold business we see a very different man. He is almost daffy in the open but suddenly Stephen becomes a commanding presence that seems to be the truer aspect of this man. Jackson is outstanding the way he breaks all expectations he created by Stephen's behavior beforehand was only his very own ruse, and in fact he seems in more of control of everything that Calvin is. Jackson is particularly strong in the dinner scene because one moment in front of the guests he seems his daffy self than when he takes Django's wife Broomhilda to the backroom he absolutely chilling in portraying Stephen incisive interrogation. 

What is incredible though is when Stephen requests a meeting with Calvin we see that even with the other slaves Stephen still is putting on a little, and Jackson is terrific the way he loses any of the weaknesses Stephen suggests in the situation and in fact seems to be even in charge of Calvin in a way. He is excellent because he makes the dichotomy of this man believable, and slowly uncovers it in a fantastic fashion to the greatest affect. Jackson overrides DiCaprio as the man villain as Stephen is the one who actually spots the game of Django and Schultz which is shown in a brilliant moment for Jackson. Jackson is extremely good showing both sides of Stephen at the same time first saying in his more aloof fashion that they should all look at Broomhilda's scars than though when seeing Django's reaction we see the intelligent decisive Stephen come out.

Of course this is not to say DiCaprio takes just a oreback seat and he comes back for one more set of scenes after Calvin learns the truth. DiCaprio is excellent as the intensity of Calvin comes out more, which works because he properly suggested earlier on. My only complaint would be that when DiCaprio yells he loses his accent a bit, and it is the only time he loses his strength as Calvin at all. Still he makes up for it through his quieter moments of Calvin's threats to Django and Schultz. For example when he breaks the glass and yells his threat that they will be shot he goes off the proper chart of Calvin a little bit, but he more than makes up for when later he quietly indicates to his man to murder Broomhilda if Schultz does not shake his hand. Really my complaints of this performance are nitpicks, and it is a very effective villianous turn by Dicaprio.

(For DiCaprio)
Now Calvin leaves but Stephen stays and we get the last thirty minutes of the picture which are by far the weakest parts of the film. If there is a saving grace of the last thirty minutes it definitely is we get more of Jackson. His threat to Django is a stunning scene and Jackson brings out the grim brutality of the situation in a fantastic fashion. Now this is wasted a bit by Quentin Tarantino by having the mining company that is suppose to be far more horrible than they turn out to be, unless of course Jackson was really talking about their acting than thanks to Tarantino's performance Stephen was right. Later on Jackson gets another great scene where Stephen defiantly stands showing the true Stephen. Of course Tarantino's wastes this again by just getting another scene of Django far too easily taking care of the situation rather than a showdown between the two which would have been far more interesting and satisfying. Anyway Jackson's efforts here at the end are great, and honestly he alone makes me feel that the last thirty minutes are not a complete waste of time. He uses the time to make Stephen a truly imposing villain, even if Tarantino's wastes it does not diminish Jackson's achievement which is tremendous.

(For Jackson)

DJANGO UNCHAINED

DJANGO UNCHAINED
Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino
Starring Christoph Waltz, Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kerry Washington

Dr. King Schultz (referring to the bounty hunter profession): Like slavery, it's a flesh for cash trade.

DJANGO UNCHAINED? More like Tarantino unchained, if you ask me. When watching a Quentin Tarantino movie, there is always a danger that his undeniable genius will fall prey to his also undeniable ego. He often walks the fine line between these two elements with surprising grace and subsequently makes insightful works that are distinctly his style. In DJANGO UNCHAINED though, Tarantino's attempt at a Western / Blaxploitation hybrid, he veers too far off course and ends up losing his edge in the sprawling drawl of the Old West.

DJANGO UNCHAINED is a bounty hunter, buddy western for about an hour and then a hyper violent,  romantic quest for about two hours after that. The two parts did not come together for me but either way, I never felt that Tarantino was ever truly able to make himself fit into these genres. There are moments where his unique style feels perfectly suited to the subject, but it often times felt more forced than anything else. Christophe Waltz, who embodied Tarantino's spirit so perfectly in his Oscar-winning turn in INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, is completely miscast here. As a German dentist turned bounty hunter in 1858 Texas, he is more device than character, allowing Tarantino to incorporate his particular brand of dialogue to the period, justified by Waltz being foreign. You may delight in some of the things he has to say but I found it just exposed Tarantino's unease with the period.

Waltz acquires a slave by the name of Django (Jamie Foxx) at the onset of the film. He is sympathetic to the plight of the American slave but that doesn't stop him from purchasing Django for his own gain. When he sees how cruelly Django is treated by the people they encounter, he sets him "free" and the twosome become the biggest, badass bounty hunters around. There is a sense of shock in just how appalling people are towards their black slaves and Tarantino is here to rescue them. In this sense, DJANGO is no more than an extension of what he was going for in BASTERDS. Only instead of the Jews rising up against the Nazis, now Tarantino rewrites the history of the black slaves, giving them a hero to rise up against their oppressors.

Along the way, Waltz and Foxx come across Leonardo DiCaprio, a plantation owner reputed for fighting his slaves to their deaths. This man owns Django's wife (Kerry Washington). And when it comes time for Django to take back what is his (which is a whole other form of slavery, but no matter), everything ends in a seemingly never-ending blood bath, that plays out more like a video game, where the goal is to kill as many white supremacists as possible. It isn't triumphant though, just incessant and relentless. You can almost feel Tarantino's smug sense of satisfaction in the end but it's misguided. You cannot rewrite the wrongs of history by just shooting the crap out of them and thinking yourself a hero for having done so.

312. Django Unchained

312. (19 Dec) Django Unchained (2012, Quentin Tarantino) 75



Coming off the lean, perfectly structured Inglourious Basterds, it's not really a surprise or much a disappointment that Django Unchained isn't on par. Mostly, it's the absence of Sally Menke as film editor that's deeply felt, since this doesn't have the sharpness her collaborations with Tarantino had. But this is nevertheless engaging and exhilarating. To his credit, the substantial runtime isn't felt for a second due to clever scripting that crafts believable relationships and allows on-screen time to pass fluidly.

Christoph Waltz is certainly the standout here, though Leonardo DiCaprio sinks his teeth into a menacing role. Samuel L. Jackson, offering a variation on his same old schtick, is impossibly fun to watch chew scenery. Jamie Foxx and Kerry Washington could have been recast midway through the film without anyone noting their absence.

Robert Richardson's cinematography is outstanding, as are the sets and costumes. Oscar nominations for most technical aspects are in order.

It took two viewings of Inglourious Basterds to fully appreciate this, so I have every intention of revisiting Django. It's so dense and thoughtful, full of nuanced arcs, all the while being quite reverential to its genre. There's a great deal to take in on a single go-around, and surely much reward in a second or third attempt.

Alternate Best Actor 2008: Results

5. Leonardo DiCaprio in Revolutionary Road- DiCaprio certainly tries as hard as he possibly can in the role, but unfortunately his performance never quite comes together in the way the film wants it to.

4. Clint Eastwood in Gran Torino- Eastwood shows his usual strong presence here, and uses his unique individualistic screen persona brilliantly here.

3. Michael Fassbender in Hunger- Fassbender gives a strong performance showing the incredible unshakable drive in his character.

2. Colin Farrell in In Bruges- Farrell proves himself an extremely capable actor here as he creates both a energetically hilarious performance as well as quite a moving portrait of guilt.

1. Brendan Gleeson in In Bruges- This year is quite a terrible year for the academy missing out on such strong work for the over the top mannerisms of Penn and Langella as well as just the extreme blandness of Pitt. They in particular missed out on this great performance by Brendan Gleeson that is a unique very moving portrait of a career killer who is anything but cold blooded, and also to his credit Gleeson is simply hilarious particularly due to his chemistry with his co-stars of Farrell and Ralph Fiennes.

Overall Rank:

1. Brendan Gleeson in In Bruges
2. Colin Farrell in In Bruges
3. Michael Fassbender in Hunger
4. Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler
5. Jeremy Renner in The Hurt Locker
6. Clint Eastwood in Gran Torino
7. Philip Seymour Hoffman in Doubt
8. Richard Jenkins in The Visitor
9. Daniel Craig in Quantum of Solace
10. Leonardo DiCaprio in Revolutionary Road
11. Michael Sheen in Frost/Nixon
12. Jason Statham in The Bank Job
13. Ed Harris in Appaloosa
14. Leonardo DiCaprio in Body of Lies 
15. Daniel Craig in Defiance
16. Ben Stiller in Tropic Thunder
17. Sylvester Stallone in Rambo
18. Liam Neeson in Taken
19. Ed Norton in The Incredible Hulk
20. Tom Cruise in Valkyrie
21. Dev Patel in Slumdog Millionaire
22. Ricky Gervais in Ghost Town
23. Javier Bardem in Vicky Cristina Barcelona
24. Harrison Ford in The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
25. Frank Langella in Frost/Nixon
26. Sean Penn in Milk
27. Brad Pitt in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Next Year: 1947

Alternate Best Actor 2008: Leonardo DiCaprio in Revolutionary Road

Leonardo DiCaprio did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Frank Wheeler in Revolutionary Road.

Revolutionary Road is rather stale telling of the old soulless suburbanites tale that takes place in the 50's. 

Revolutionary Road seemed set up to be an Oscar film considering it is about a very dysfunctional relationship, and with beautiful people acting very ugly. The film failed to find success when the film only received three nominations two of them for technical achievement and one for Michael Shannon's over the top portrayal of a mentally disturbed man. I must say though many of the performances in this film seem off the mark and overly ACTING, yet do not seem to dive deeper into their characters. I did like Shannon to some degree because at least he is entertaining if over the top, but most of the performances are just dull even though they are portrayed in such an obvious fashion. 

Watching the film again I unfortunately find that this performance problem even finds itself in the leads as well. Kate Winslet as April Wheeler actually never really comes into her role, and frankly never knows exactly how to play her part, leaving a serious problem when it comes to Leonardo DiCaprio's performance who I have to say actually tries his best and does his best to avoid being overly obvious in his performance. Another problem though against DiCaprio though is that Frank Wheeler probably would have been better played by someone much more average looking than DiCaprio, and seeming to be more from the 50's. A great deal of the time DiCaprio never quite seems a fit for all those nice suits.

I will get through all the negatives first, but I will say before this that I do not think this is a bad performance. Another problem though with DiCaprio's performance involves the scripts own weaknesses. A major plot point is that Frank although hates his job, and being in the soulless environment is too afraid apparently to ever get out of it. The film never really finds this fear, and neither does DiCaprio. He never makes it something that is constantly weighing on Frank that keeps him in place. It just never is made vivid enough to really explain why exactly that Frank sits still in his place, and through his own actions stays there.

One other problem comes from the film's failure really to establish these characters as we come into them. Frank is suppose to be already apparently in his firm place within the company and has found his place within the repetitiveness of it all. DiCaprio never quite gets the idea of the history of Frank through well enough in his performance. He shows a bit boredom, but there is never an overarching emotion of just how much this existence pains him. DiCaprio of course does indeed show frustrations, but perhaps too casual of ones that just seem of the moment rather than something larger that has been going on for years. I will say that the film really does not give him enough time to really establish effectively though.

The other problem comes in his relationship with Winslet's character primarily in the scene where they are not at other's throats. The few scenes where their relationship seems like it might be working are severely lacking, and the two actors surprisingly, despite having it in Titanic, lack the necessary chemistry to make it work. Neither of the two actors really show why they would have every come together in the first place other than the fact they look like Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet. The two are emotionally stagnate even in these scenes, and it really fails to make their relationship any more than one based purely on their hate. Although it should be something more than there is, again there are too few scenes to establish again, but still with the time given the actors are unable to bring appropriate truth to their relationship.

Even with all these problems though I still don't dislike this performance, because even though he never is amazing he still is fine actually. For example, I said he really does not show the history of the man's pain in regard to being in such a job and such a life, he still adequately shows the pain of his current predicament to some degree. There is not the fear in his performance to suggest what the film wants to suggest that is keeping Frank in place. But DiCaprio actually does suggest more of a general comfort Frank does actually have in his office setting, and DiCaprio shows that this feeling grows within him once he finds that he is being recognized at his job quite naturally. DiCaprio handles this very well, but the film itself wants something out of him that he does not convey.

Although Winslet and DiCaprio's "happy" scenes are thoroughly unimpressive, their fighting scenes are better handled, by DiCaprio anyway. Winslet I feel actually doesn't transition particularly well to her extreme coldness since she comes from her somewhat awkward excitement earlier. DiCaprio though plays it straight and frankly more realistically shows Frank's frustrations. DiCaprio is actually quite good in his portrayal of his increasing anger that slowly builds up fight after fight, and is quite effective in showing just how distraught he becomes in their final bout with one another. DiCaprio though also does suggest that Frank does love her through all of this which is why he shows Frank to be as heartbroken as he is when she says she hates him.

In the end really DiCaprio is the best part of the film because he earnestly tries his best with the part of Frank. I do honestly believe though that DiCaprio was perhaps a bit miscast in the role, as never quite fits the role as well as he should. At the same time though he does fairly well in the role considering everything that is against him whether it is his overacting co-stars or the script that demands frankly more from his character than the film itself allowed for. DiCaprio still consistently tries his very best with the role, and does succeed to some degree. This is not a great performance by any means, but I still would say it is a descent performance by Dicaprio.

Alternate Best Actor 2008

And the Nominees Were Not:

Brendan Gleeson in In Bruges

Colin Farrell in In Bruges

Michael Fassbender in Hunger

Clint Eastwood in Gran Torino

Leonardo DiCaprio in Revolutionary Road

Titanic

Titanic, 1997
Directed by James Cameron
Nominated for 14 Oscars, Won 11
Up Against: As Good As It Gets, Full Monty, Good Will Hunting, LA Confidental

We all know the story of Titanic, especially now, with the world reminding us of it's 100th anniversary since it's sinking. For those of you who've been hiding under a rock, Titanic was, at the time, the largest ship in the world, and was struck by an iceberg on it's maiden voyage, killing 68.2% of all people on board, around 1523 people. The movie follows 2 young people. Jack Dawson, a young man who wins his ticket onto the Titanic in a poker game. He's poor, but has big dreams and takes nothing in life for granted. When he sets eyes on Rose, he makes a connection that will change his life. Rose is an upper class lady, engaged to marry a very rich man. But Rose is unhappy with her life. She detests everyone around her, and wants to live life, and see the world, not to submit to a husband whom she doesn't love, or do what people tell her to. She meets Jack while trying to work up the courage to jump off the end of the Titanic, to kill herself. He convinces her to stay, and saves her life when she slips and almost falls into the water after trying to climb back onto the boat. After this, the two find themselves falling in love.

While watching this movie, I realized I had come to see it on an interesting day. April 14th. The Titanic went down very early (2:20am) on April 15th. It was uncanny timing, as I hadn't planned it, but it was eerie nonetheless. The Titanic is a topic I find extraordinarily interesting and a story I've always felt myself drawn to. While it definitely wasn't the largest boat accident/sinking, it sunk under such unusual circumstances, and on it's maiden voyage, leaving so many dead and frozen in the waters. I hadn't seen this film in a really long time. I've seen bits and pieces over the years when it plays on TV, but haven't watched the whole thing for probably 4 or 5 years. So it was almost like watching a whole new film, as I remembered so little.

If I'm correct, this film is what really brought Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio into the international limelight. Kate, playing Rose, received her first Academy Award nomination. Kate was delightful as Rose. She captured her spirit, her ambition, and her fire and really made her believable. Leonardo DiCaprio played Jack, who had initially turned the role down. Leo was also great in his role, playing the smart but poor young man who finds himself falling for Rose. Surprisingly, he received no nomination.

This film is incredibly stunning. The shots of the ship are gorgeous. James Cameron did a phenomenal job with everything set related. He studied everything he could on the Titanic for several years, and even organizaed several dives to the wreckage site over 2 years, and having filmed and looked farther into the Titanic than anyone else had been since it's original passengers. All the footage seen in the film was Cameron's own footage of his dives. Cameron constructed a replica of the Titanic which was almost to full scale, thought the lifeboats and funnels were 90% to scale and only the starboard side of the ships exterior was completed. The sets were reconstructed either by or under the supervision of researchers of the White Star Line, the company that created the original ship. Cameron studied the Titanic for 5 years before going into production. As a result, his film is made incredibly accurately. The interior set designs were based off the original blueprints of the ship, and modeled after her sister ship, Olympic.

The filming of the sinking scenes were 90% filmed on set. The replica boat was able to be put on an angle to make it appear as though it's sinking, and the destruction of the infamous staircase was truly destroyed by the water. The scene of the ship splitting was also the actual replica. It was split into several sections, and was actually sunk, and filmed. Cameron was really striving for accuracy when filming, and wanted to show it's sinking as it probably actually happened, and did this, for the most part, without computer generated effects.

James Horner, no stranger to the film world at that point, composed the music, as well as the song "My Heart Will Go On". The music in this movie is gorgeous, with a flicker of Irish, and really captures the love between Rose and Jack. And everything technical, whether it be costumes, art/set direction, cinematography, everything was so well done. It's even said that every single female extra wore corsets, even if they were in the background and hardly seen.

What I love about this film is how it portrays the sinking. It doesn't talk facts, or stats, or anything like that. It focuses on two people, who were there and experienced it, and makes you realize as interesting as something like the Titanic sinking was, it was a real story, and so many people were lost. And that's the point Cameron really wanted to get across. While the story of Jack and Rose is a little cliche, it made the story of the Titanic personal, and real. And that came across so well.

Titanic really is an epic film. We get the real story, and see what it was like from several different points of view. We see how the third class were locked in for so long, many of them drowning in the ship. We see the first class people in the boats, not willing to turn back and save those who were in the water, stranded. We see that only one life boat went back to find survivors, only to find it was too late. We see people jumping off the boat, people hanging on for dear life. We see the people who willingly stayed behind; an elderly couple who laid in bed as the water drifts in, and a mother with her two children telling them a story. We see things from all different kinds of perspectives, making this story all the more heartbreaking. We're frustrated with the workers on the ship when we hear they're sending out lifeboats not even half full, even though there's not enough boats for even half the people on board. We see the captain go down with the ship, and people killing themselves. All of this perfectly executed by Cameron, and most of it filmed, as I mentioned before, on set, rather than visual effects. 

This movie has come down as a classic. It's won 11 Oscars, tied for the most won. It was nominated for 14, tied for most nominated. It's the 2nd highest grossing film in the world (was the first until 2010). It's regarded as one of the best romance movies, and it spent the most weeks at the top of the box office, consecutively. It gave Leonardo DiCaprio international "hottie" status, and sprung both Kate Winslet's and Leonardo DiCaprio's career to a higher level. The film was made after dedicated research and even several Titanic historians were hired to validate much of what Cameron was doing.

Honestly, I really loved this movie. The acting is great, the story is tragic, and just everything is so accurate, you can tell James Cameron has such a passion for this story and for this event. He made it personal, instead of just facts and being an "interesting event". While many criticize it for being a love story, being long, etc, this is something I really liked. I like that sometimes romances win Best Picture. They're a part of the movie culture, and it's a part of most everyone's lives. The film was exceedingly well done, and had so much heart and soul put into it. Plus I'm a girl, and I'm allowed to love romance movies right?

8.75/10

The Departed

The Departed, 2006
Directed by Martin Scorsese
Nominated for 5 Oscars, Won 4
Won BP over Babel, Letters from Iwo Jima, Little Miss Sunshine and The Queen

Synopsis: Billy Costigan wants to be a cop. But with his family history of crime, no one will hire him. Until they need a man to go undercover, to be the mole in Frank Costello's crime ring. Costello's been avoiding the law, and being arrested for a long, long time, and Billy is the perfect spy. His family was friends with Frank Costello and his partners, and Billy gains Costello's trust very easily. Meanwhile, Colin Sullivan is an up-and-coming cop, rising in the Special Investigations Unit. He's brilliant, and has a pitch perfect past. And that makes him the perfect mole in the SIU. Being a friend and worker for Frank Costello since childhood, Sullivan is the perfect mole in the Boston Police force. But when both sides suspect a mole, Billy and Colin race to uncover the other, to save their own skins.

Before I write this review, I must say, Cop/Mafia/Gangster/Lots of swearing films aren't really my thing. This is going to gain the most positive review from me simply because I don't generally enjoy these types of films, and I can't appreciate films where the character have extremely limited and dirty vocabulary.

That being said, we move on. This film had an interesting premise, even if it sounded a tad bit cliche. The seemingly rough guy is the good guy, while the guy with the spotless past and the up-and-comer being the bad guy. But we know that right away. But the two sides don't, and the moles themselves don't know who the other one is.

The performances in this film were great. I thought Leonardo DiCaprio rocked the whole show and was surprised to see he wasn't nominated for the role (only to see he was nominated for Blood Diamond instead...I'm assuming he was fantastic in that role, I still haven't seen it.) Additionally, Matt Damon is pretty much always great, in my opinion. He played the good guy/bad guy really well (even if a lot of the movie he had a dopey-gaping look on his face). I was surprised to see Mark Walhberg nominated for his Supporting Role, having had very little screen time. I'd have liked him to have been in it more. (Though is it only me that thinks Matt Damon and Mark Walhberg could be twins? During the opening I was having trouble figuring out if Colin was Damon or Walhberg, until we saw Walhberg had thick dark hair. Good thing he did, or they'd have been indistinguishable)

The film was well told, if not a little long for my taste. We see both sides trying to weed out who the mole is. Colin Sullivan is near the top and is quickly able to conceal himself, while Billy Costigan is a little more exposed. Personally, I couldn't understand why Costello didn't figure it out. It was blatantly obvious to me, and I don't know why he didn't pick up on it.

Anyway, the film had lots of twists and turns, and was well told. We feel for both characters, both living double lives, trying to make their way through.

Overall, I thought it was just an okay film. I found nothing about it that was incredible, or amazing. While Leonardo DiCaprio was really good in it, it was otherwise just an average film. At least, those are my thoughts.

(short review, but I honestly don't have much to say about it. It was kind of whatever. Not bad, but not brilliant.)

7/10

461. J. Edgar

461. (12 Nov) J. Edgar (2011, Clint Eastwood)* 67



One of the more competent biopics of the last decade, Eastwood and Dustin Lance Black find a balance between intimate personal moments with J. Edgar Hoover while confronting his more questionable professional decisions. While most biopics flatter their subject, this is a truly bold take on the man.

Leonardo DiCaprio solidifies his frontrunner status for Best Actor. His accent may be unconvincing, but he brings an impressive physicality to the role. Armie Hammer overshadows him at times, but it's built into the film. Eastwood makes an awesome decision to light Hammer rapturously when we first meet him, suggesting how charismatic and irresistible he was to Hoover. Meanwhile, DiCaprio's eyes are always lit so they look like black marbles.

The film is structured competently and engaging. This is an ambitious undertaking. While it doesn't stack up to Eastwood's better works, it's getting an unfair reputation.

J. EDGAR

Written by Dustin Lance Black

Directed by Clint Eastwood

Starring Leonard Dicaprio, Armie Hammer, Naomi Watts and Judi Dench

Annie Hoover: Edgar, I would rather have a dead son than a daffodil for a son.

Considering Clint Eastwood has lived to witness most of what he chooses to depict in his J. Edgar Hoover biography, simply titled J. EDGAR, it is an awful shame that so much of it feels lifeless and false. Eastwood’s Hoover accomplishes great things, like taking fingerprint technology nationwide and forensic science to new heights, but he does so with very little fanfare, subsequently inspiring even less interest in his audience. Fortunately, incredible performances by Leonardo Dicaprio and Armie Hammer, as the notorious FBI director and his rumoured romantic partner of many years, Clyde Tolson, elevate the picture high enough to overshadow the drab, washed out stiffness of Eastwood’s former America. Dustin Lance Black’s script is smart not to focus solely on Hoover’s sexuality, but unfortunately, the film only truly comes alive when it does.